PM--not a leader to be emulated

Dr. MM Singh is a very bad example for our people. He has legitimized falsehood and lies. He is a member of Rajya Sabha from Guwahati on a false declaration about his being a domicile of Assam when in fact he has not lived there for a day. How could one become a domicile of a place/state where he or she has not lived for a day? The PM needs to do some explaining. Every Indian knows where he belongs to. Yet he has made this declaration with impunity, and he claims to be an honest man. Is this honesty? A man who does not have the confidence of his own people cannot claim to be honest. Such a man will always lack credibility. Its our misfortune that we have such a man as our prime minister. If corruption has taken a firm root under his command, it is quite understandable. Therefore, when Anna Hazare says fake assurances will not be accepted, he echoes the sentiments of all Indians who care for India. I for one do not believe Dr. MMS will ever be able to do anything good for the country simply because his writ does not run and he does not command respectability. Also, his intents are suspect & foul. This knowledge also emboldens me to go all out to wage a war against corruption under the benign and bold leadership of Anna Hazare. Our PM is not a man to be emulated.

Appreciate if this is propagated through Facebook,Twitter and My Space Lets join hand together.We need to open an account in above said spaces

I agreee, is there any page in FB for this?

Question is - who made him PM? We did - when we went out to vote and, more importantly when we did not go out to vote. I am talking in particular of the middle-class, who chose to relax at home when election day was declared a holiday!

The middle-class has the most at stake - and lose - because they do not vote. They are the most affected - be it prices, taxation, electricity, water - you name it. The lowest strata have nothing to lose - so just a hut, some water (and perhaps, electricity) is enough for them. The rich don't care - they can buy what they want! That leaves the majority - the middle-class - that suffers. The middle-class also complains a lot...but then it is this very middle-class that is lax when it comes to voting. Agreed, all parties are more or less the same - but choosing the least rotten among them will atleast "force" the others to somewhat improve for the next elections, isn't it?

The answer to your question is--Sonia Gandhi made him PM. For a change people of this country had absolutely no role to play in making Dr. MMS the prime minister of India. He was not an elected member of Lok Sabha. Therefore not in the running for the post. So whether we cast our vote or not, it did not matter. He came in through back door by swearing a false affidavit that he was a domiciled resident of Assam C/O Hiteshwar Saikia, the then CM of Assam. Sonia found him pliable enough to make him PM so that when Rahul was ready to take over, he quietly vanished into oblivion.

Yes but what made it possible for Sonia to do so? The fact that congress managed to come into power because of our votes (and also because of non-voting) - albeit by coalition.

It's always good to self-introspect and find answers to our queries. I suffer no qualms because I have always cast my vote no matter what the situation. But then, if you have a choice of selecting least evil from amongst the evils, this is no choice at all. Our democracy suffers from this infirmity. We need to reform our electoral system if we want quality people in the system. Thanks nonetheless.

Although electoral reforms is the need of the hour, we cannot expect the current leadership with vested interest ,to push any electoral reforms. Therefore we will continue to have many elected representatives to indulge in corrupt practices .

The only hope the civil society has, is in insisting on a stringent lokpal, which should hang like democles' sword over the neck of parliamentarians and top bureaucrats.

On Facebook: India Against Corruption | Facebook